REVIEW 4 cited by
TestGenEval: A Real World Unit Test Generation and Test Completion Benchmark
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Code generation models can help improve many common software tasks ranging from code completion to defect prediction. Most of the existing benchmarks for code generation LLMs focus on code authoring or code completion. Surprisingly, there has been far less effort dedicated to benchmarking software testing, despite the strong correlation between well-tested software and effective bug detection. To address this gap, we create and release TestGenEval, a large-scale benchmark to measure test generation performance. Based on SWEBench, TestGenEval comprises 68,647 tests from 1,210 code and test file pairs across 11 well-maintained Python repositories. It covers initial tests authoring, test suite completion, and code coverage improvements. Test authoring simulates the process of a developer writing a test suite from scratch, while test completion mimics the scenario where a developer aims to improve the coverage of an existing test suite. We evaluate several popular models, with sizes ranging from 7B to 405B parameters. Our detailed analysis highlights TestGenEval's contribution to a comprehensive evaluation of test generation performance. In particular, models struggle to generate high-coverage test suites, with the best model, GPT-4o, achieving an average coverage of only 35.2%. This is primarily due to models struggling to reason about execution, and their frequent assertion errors when addressing complex code paths.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
ViseGPT: Towards Better Alignment of LLM-generated Data Wrangling Scripts and User Prompts
ViseGPT automatically converts user prompts into test cases and visualizes which steps of an LLM-generated data wrangling script pass or fail.
-
Benchmarking LLMs for Unit Test Generation from Real-World Functions
A new decontaminated benchmark of complex Python functions shows LLMs generate far fewer correct, covering, and bug-killing unit tests than on older benchmarks.
-
SimdBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for SIMD-Intrinsic Code Generation
All 18 evaluated LLMs pass fewer SIMD-intrinsic code-generation tests than scalar-code tests on the new SimdBench benchmark, with the largest drops on SVE and RVV.
-
FrontendBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLMs on Front-End Development via Automatic Evaluation
A new benchmark adds 148 interactive front-end development tasks with automated sandbox tests, reporting a 90.54% agreement rate with human evaluation across four LLMs.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.